At a time when all public services are under pressure, councils are striving to save money while providing a better service too. Centre for Justice (CfJ) research suggests that by changing the way they handle complaints and disputes, local authorities can do just that.

Council staff can often find themselves forced into an adversarial position when presented with a problem or concern from a resident or service user. Officers may spend countless hours defending decisions or pursuing a complaint in a way that serves only to aggravate and prolong the problem.

This time is a resource that is not recorded or accounted for. Our research shows the loss caused by conflict between councils and residents accounts for up to 10% of staff time. Other business research suggests management spend as much as 40% of their time managing conflict. It is easy to imagine what one could do with these scarce resources. How then to recover this lost time? CfJ has worked on this problem by acting as a mediator between a council and another party. This process can help to identify the real problem, and find a solution.

In a social care this process may include finding out exactly which needs must be met, what the available resources are within the family and what the council can provide, and negotiating the solution.

This you cannot be achieved in court: if you call for a judicial review, all you will usually get at the end of the costly process is a judgment on whether the council did or did not follow correct procedures. The problem itself is never addressed or resolved.

Mediation can remove the need to go to court. Working with a partner such as CfJ to carry out this process means any decision is legally binding under the Arbitration Act. A constructive solution everyone can be happy with is almost invariably achieved at this stage.This gives you an early and definite result, and the council benefits from the input, advice and support of an independent arbitrator throughout.

A conclusion is drawn in just 10% of the time a court decision would take – and at less than 10% of the cost. The approach also leads to a positive result and can restore broken relationships. It puts the council in control of cost and risk: you have the view of the arbitrator on the legal position at an early stage, and can make decisions based on this view. The council has a firm estimate of the costs, and does not run the risk of paying the other party's costs if it loses.

Not only do councils as organisations gain from this approach, but so do those they deal with: staff, clients, suppliers and partners. Morale and performance are increased among staff, and communities improve their levels of social cohesion, inclusion and acommunity health.

Mediation services exist and and are proving their worth. It is now simply a matter for councils to adopt and offer this route to those who lodge a dispute.

Anthony Hurndall is a solicitor and director of the Centre for Justice, a not-for-profit body specialising in dispute resolution